Kolkata Court February 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Amitabh Bagchi Vs. Ena Bagchi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-16-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Cal11,(2004)3CALLT263(HC)
A. Lala, J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by the District Judge at Howrah on 8th September, 2003 in the Miscellaneous Case No. 89 of 2001 arising out of Matrimonial Suit No. 487 of 2000.2. The fact reveals that the petitioner's husband instituted the aforesaid Matrimonial Suit in the appropriate Court of District Howrah because according to him marriage was solemnized therein under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Thereafter, they shifted along with the parents of the petitioner to New Delhi and consequently to the United States of America. However, the opposite party/wife stayed there for sometime due to passport and/or clearance of visa etc. Thereafter she also went there and stayed at the matrimonial house at Chicago, United States of America. According to the petitioner, due to various reasons which will be reflected from the statements in the plaint as well as application, she herself left the matrimonial house an...
Shreegopal Govind Sponge Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)1CALLT407(HC)
Maharaja Sinha, J.1. In this writ application, the writ petitioners have sought for mandatory orders in the form of writ or writs directing the concerned respondent or respondents to grant linkage in favour of the petitioners for their two industrial units on the basis of the recommendations of the 6th and the 7th respondents herein, treating the units of the petitioners as priority units on the basis of the policy of the Government of India and also as the units of the petitioners are core sector units, in terms of the provisions of Colliery Control Order, 1945.2. A mandatory order in the form of a writ directing the concerned respondents to supply the graded coal from the sources of Eastern Coalfields Limited for the said two units of the petitioners, at G-4 Mongalpur Industrial Estate, at Raniganj, in the District of Burdwan, West Bengal.3. A declaration has also been sought for the said two units of the petitioners at Mongalpur Industrial Estate, at Raniganj, in the District of Bur...
Parimal Kr. Das and ors. Vs. Prasun Kr. Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)1CALLT621(HC),2004(2)CHN465
Prabir Kumar Samanta, J.1. The opposite party herein has filed an application for grant of probate of the alleged will executed by the testator Nripendra Nath Das dated 19th February, 1998. The said case has been registered as Act XXXIX Case No. 119 of 2000. In the said proceeding no citation has been made in respect of the present petitioners who are the sons of the brother of the said testator. He said testator was unmarried. The petitioners accordingly made an application for being added as parties to the above probate proceeding to contest the grant under the provisions of Order 1, Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the Code. The trial Court by the order dated 18th May, 2001 has rejected the said application. The said order is under challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The facts giving rise to the above impugned order may be summarised as under:-One Narayan Chandra Das died leaving behind him one married daughter and four sons i.e. Monorama ...
Asar Sheikh Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)CHN93
P.N. Sinha, J.1. This revisional application is directed against the order dated 3.12.03 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Nadia in Sessions Case No. 13(9) of 2003 thereby rejecting petitioner's prayer to stay the said sessions case till the counter case being Nakashipara P. S. Case No. 26/2003 is transferred to the said Court.2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that over incident dated 15.2.03 case and counter case was started at Nakashipara Police Station being Nakashipara P.S. Case No. 25 dated 15.2.03 and Nakashipara P.S. Case No. 26 dated 16.2.03. This petitioner was made an accused in Nakashipara P.S. Case No. 25 dated 15.2.03. After completing investigation the police submitted chargesheet in both the said cases and the Nakashipara P.S. Case No 25/2003 has already been committed to the Court of Sessions and after transfer to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court it has been registered as S.C. Case No. 13(9) of 2003. An a...
Damodar Valley Corporation Vs. Cesc Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Cal67,2005(1)ARBLR520(Cal),(2005)4CompLJ364(Cal)
ORDERJayanta Kumar Biswas, J. 1. This execution proceeding (E.C. 37 of 2003) has been initiated by an application dated July 16th, 2003.2. Disputes and differences between Damodar Valley Corporation (in short DVC) and Calcutta Electric Supply Company Limited (in short CESC) were referred to arbitration. The arbitrators made the award dated June 27th, 2001 under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Issue No. 3 was decided in favour of DVC, while the chief issue, that is, issue No. 1, was decided against it.3. The disputes arose between the parties regarding the payment of charges for supplying electrical energy by DVC to CESC during the period from January 1st, 1995 to October 19th, 1998. During this period energy was supplied without there being any written contract between the parties. The previous written agreement dated April 30th, 1990 had expired on December 31st, 1994. DVC claimed that on account of change in the tariff rates, in the ...
Debasish Deb Roy Vs. Karuna Deb Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2004
Reported in: 2006(2)CHN157
S.P. Talukdar, J.1. This relates to an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and it is directed against Order No. 8 dated 13.06.2003 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Calcutta in Misc. Case No. 10 of 2003.2. Grievances of the petitioner may briefly be stated as follows:Marriage between the parties took place on 15th July, 1992 and it was duly solemnized according to Hindu Rites and Customs. Opposite party/wife during her stay at her matrimonial home was found to be addict and used to consume liqueor regularly. She insisted for separate accommodation knowing fully well that the petitioner is the only son of his parents could not afford to agree to the same. O.P. started torturing the petitioner both mentally and physically. Thereafter, on 10.04.1993, she left her matrimonial home on her own and started residing with her parents. Petitioner tried to bring her back but to no avail. His several letters, though received by the O.P., were not replied to. O...
Himangshu Kumar Basu Vs. Sudhangshu Kumar Basu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)CHN389
1. Affidavit-in-Opposition and Affidavit-in-Reply filed in Court today be kept with the record.2. This is application for clarification of the order passed by this Court on 27.11.2003 whereunder the First Miscellaneous Appeal, being 1319 of 1997, was disposed of. Previously verbally and subsequently with the leave of the Court by way of application, Mr. Jayanta Kr. Mitra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that in two places particularly in the 5th and 6th line from the bottom of page 6 and 2nd and 3rd line the bottom of first paragraph of page 9 whereunder it has been recorded that the legacy will pass only upon completion of administration means it will pass in accordance with law. I have already discussed in respect of effectivity of Section 141 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. Therefore, there is no necessity of incorporation of any further save and except the words 'in accordance with law' at the end of the sentence which starts with 'yet.........ad...
Monoranjan Mondal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)CHN545
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. By this writ application, the writ petitioner has prayed for quashing of FIR registered on June 14, 1999 and the consequential investigation in CBI/ SPE/ ACB/Calcutta Case No. RC 18/99 under Sections 120B/420/468/471/ 477A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.2. The facts giving rise to the filing of the instant writ application may be summarised thus :a) The petitioner was entrusted by the Eastern Railways to do various works as per diverse contracts sometimes in the year 1986. Ultimately, disputes arose as to the amount payable to the petitioner by virtue of those contracts and consequently the differences were referred to arbitration in terms of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. By an order dated May 8, 1998 the then Hon'ble Chief Justice appointed Justice Anil Kumar Sen, a retired Chief Justice of this Court, as the sole Arbitrator in respect of all the 26 applications filed ...
Biswanath Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-2004
Reported in: [2004]267ITR687(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. Mr. R. N. Mitra, learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue, has taken a preliminary point of maintainability of this writ petition saying that there exists alternative remedy. The writ petitioner should have resorted to that first and after having exhausted the same it should have approached this court. I have no hesitation to reject this submission on two grounds. Firstly, if the question of jurisdiction of any statutory authority is raised, the writ court in its discretion, as a rule, entertains such petition. Secondly, the theory of alternative remedy does not operate as an absolute bar. It may be a question of convenience and discretion of the writ court. At the time of admission of this matter this court in exercise of discretion has entertained the matter and passed an interim order. The question of jurisdiction should have been raised at the first available opportunity, namely, at the time of admission. It is not a question of inherent lack of ...
West Bengal State Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Inc ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(Cal)117,[2004]268ITR462(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The impugned notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), dated December 18, 2002, and the other four orders dated December 19, 2002, one each relating to the assessment years 1996-97 to 2000-2001 are under challenge in this present application.2. In regular assessment, the petitioner filed returns of income for the assessment years 1996-97 to 2000-01. The assessment orders were passed by the Assessing Officer allowing refund in each assessment year of a substantial amount. The petitioner accordingly from time to time claimed refund in view of the aforesaid orders. Instead of refunding the above amount the impugned notices for each year have been issued on December 18, 2002, and the impugned orders were passed, whereby and whereunder the respondents want to reassess. Pursuant to the said notice and orders the petitioner did not submit separate returns however, reiterated that the earlier returns should be ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »